For some time now I have been stating that your personality can be found in all your aliases! I have described your MO many times! By googling, What is a pathological liar?....... this is what I found! This describes you in a nutshell!.".........................


“Compulsive lying is also a known trait of some personality disorders, such as antisocial personality disorder. Trauma or head injuries may also play a role in pathological lying, along with an abnormality in hormone-cortisol ratio.

A 2016 studyTrusted Source of what happens in the brain when you lie found that the more untruths a person tells, the easier and more frequent lying becomes. The results also indicated that self-interest seems to fuel dishonesty.

Though the study didn’t specifically look at pathological lying, it may give some insight into why pathological liars lie as much and as easily as they do.

The following are some of the scientifically recognizedTrusted Source traits and characteristics of pathological liars.

Their lies seem to have no clear benefit

While a person might lie to avoid an uncomfortable situation, such as embarrassment or getting in trouble, a pathological liar tells lies or stories that don’t have an objective benefit.

Friends and family can find this especially frustrating because the person lying doesn’t stand to gain anything from their lies.

The stories they tell are usually dramatic, complicated, and detailed

Pathological liars are great storytellers. Their lies tend to be very detailed and colorful.

Even though obviously over-the-top, the pathological liar may be very convincing.

They usually portray themselves as the hero or victim

Along with being made the hero or victim in their stories, pathological liars tend to tell lies that seem to be geared at gaining admiration, sympathy, or acceptance by others.

They sometimes seem to believe the lies they tell

A pathological liar tells lies and stories that fall somewhere between conscious lying and delusion. They sometimes believe their own lies.

It’s difficult to know how to deal with a pathological liar who may not always be conscious of their lying. Some do it so often that experts believe they may not know the difference between fact and fiction after some time.

Pathological liars also tend to be natural performers. They’re eloquent and know how to engage with others when speaking. They’re creative and original, and quick thinkers who don’t usually show common signs of lying, such as long pauses or avoidance of eye contact.

When asked questions, they may speak a lot without ever being specific or answering the question.”



You can continue to deny your different characters but all the evidence is there for anyone to see for themselves!
Once a person spends a little time studying your writing style and the different ways that you use to disguise your different characters, it becomes quite easy to spot another “Rumi!” Your Devil’s Advocates are much harder to distinguish! There is a couple that you’re using now that have fooled all but a few of us, even though they also fall into the description above!

We are the “Thorn” in your side and we’ll remain to be that thorn!

Who do you think you are? Are you some kind of police officer? Do you think anyone even likes you? You aren't a thorn. You have a tree up your butt and it shows.

Actually... If you weren't so lazy and incompetent, you would know that I DID post the evidence of the hesitation, but then what can we expect from a Trumplican? Since you do not have the intellectual capacity nor the work ethic to go seek it out for yourself in a post you certainly passed on the way to this point in this same topic, I will give you a link, check it or don't, your choice but if you choose not to go look at it, you need not pester me any longer for the evidence you refuse to acknowledge.

https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-201416-16.html#3557766

You don't have to be left AT ALL to see Trump for what and who he is. Many Republicans have turned out against him, long standing very conservative Republicans. The ONLY people that haven't turned out against Trump are the fringe right it would seem.

As for Trump denouncing white supremacists, yes, he has, though it is ALWAYS delayed, with great reluctance very milquetoast and never without lumping other groups into the denouncement as a way to "water down" the denouncement. Of course he knows as well as others do that a fair number of his supporters ARE members of fringe hate groups and a fair few more aren't but would still be put off if he singled out white supremacists, white nationalist among other fringe hate groups.

Tell me, why is it that Trump so readily and so frequently demonizes SOME groups but is so reluctant to even denounce others? As for David Duke, He in 1991 condemned David Duke after David Duke's failed Louisiana gubernatorial attempt, he condemned David duke again in 2000 When he said, "David Duke just joined, a bigot, a racist, a problem. I mean, this is not exactly the people you want in your party.", yet in 2016, Trump didn't know anything about David Duke? Weren't you people giving Biden flack for his supposed "Dementia"? Remind me what are some of the symptoms of dementia... Isn't forgetting people one of the signs of dementia? So... Either Trump lied in 2016, but then you people say he doesn't lie, or he has dementia, which one are YOU puttin' money on?

https://www.instagram.com/tv/CGaL7mqn20F/?utm_source=ig_embed (Trump's comments on Duke in 1991)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr-K2kqRsmQ (Trump's comments on Duke in 2000)

So what happened to his memory in the 2016 interview excerpt below?

https://youtu.be/Gz2ETH8Gpr4?t=33 (Trump's Comments on Duke AFTER Duke endorses Trump in 2016)

He did later reluctantly denounce Duke, but he hesitated badly. Even Breitbart lambasted Trump on that one.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2016/02/28/donald-trump-has-known-about-klansman-david-duke-a-man-he-claimed-to-know-nothing-about-since-at-least-the-year-2000donald-trump-has-known-about-klansman-david-duke-a-man-he-claim/

But yes, you are right, Trump DID repeatedly denounce Duke, he just faltered when it counted. He DID eventually denounce Duke's support of him in 2016, but not nearly as quickly, harshly and strongly as he should have and that he had in the past. Of course one could expect it, he commented about Bush's denouncement of Duke as a mistake. The reason he considered it a mistake is that he thought it would lose Bush some of the Republican support, which is why Trump faltering on denouncing Duke in 2016 wasn't really any surprise, those that know Trump would have expected it. Which suggests that Trump was merely lying about not knowing anything about Duke.

So... Which is it? Is Trump a liar or suffering from dementia?

As I have said, you are so far to the right, EVERYTHING seems fringe left to you, that is YOUR issue, not mine, not MSM and not anyone or anything else. None of those sites you listed are fringe left, everyone but the fringe right know this, it is ONLY delusional, low intellect, reality challenged, RW whackadoodles that get it confused.

As for your question at the end... Do you ever get tired of answering the same question over and over and over again, especially since those asking the question love ignoring the answer or calling B.S. as soon as you give it? Yeah, you can just go ahead and keep on wondering.

That or you can just look back through our conversation, in this very conversation, in a posted reply to YOU I answered that very question. Gotta love how you completely ignore anything you don't want to hear, anything that doesn't fit with the narrative you would like to present.

Your answerr was right here, https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-201416-10.html#3541217, I was pretty sure I had already told YOU in the past and it wasn't even that long ago and in this thread even. It was YESTERDAY I posted that. How lazy and ignorant can one get?

Oh wait... Yes, NotAnEconomistDon is far too lazy to re-read (if he ever read it the first time) that whole post to discover the answer buried within, better C/P the specific portion so that he can ignore an even smaller bit of text.

"But then I am not a Trumplican, disgruntled by the fact that Trump did so poorly in that debate, as we knew he would. I am also not a big supporter of Biden even though as a centrist, I should be. Biden may be a Democrat, but he is a very moderate Democrat. I like moderates, both Republican AND Democrat. Do I or have I ever voted for a Democrat? Quite a few. Have I ever voted for a Republican? A fair few, admittedly not as many as the Democrats I have voted for but... Have I ever voted for someone from a party NOT Democrat or Republican? No, and for good reason. In this two party system we have, a vote for a third party candidate or a candidate NOT affiliated with a party is a wasted vote or to put another way, a vote for the winning party since the vote was in fact wasted on someone with little to no chance of winning it effectively didn't go to the winning party's opponent."

Now, can you see that? Do I need to print it out and staple it to your forehead? Stop being so obtuse, it isn't such a good look on ANYONE!




Edit: Unlike you, I prefer honesty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News#Pro-Republican_and_pro-Trump_bias

Okay, while I do not typically support using opinion to support one's own opinions... Since perception IS entirely based upon opinion, Isn't opinion the best "factual" support one can produce?

https://www.quora.com/Is-Fox-conservative-or-liberal

https://www.answers.com/Q/Is_FOX_news_liberal_or_conservative

Well, that covers your first unfounded claim.

Okay, now I guess we deal with both my "lack of observation" and the "Chris Wallace allegation leveled by you, since they appear to be in connection with one another. Let's start by putting the facts on the table. Your perception and the perception shared by many other Trumplicans, that Chris Wallace was biased against Trump during thew debate he moderated. That is nothing more than you and the other Trumplicans being, As many ignorant and immature Trumplican would say, "Butt hurt" that Trump and his buffoonery performed so poorly. Chris Wallace did a damned good job of attempting to keep the debate on topic and under proper control. It wasn't HIS fault that Trump is unable to control himself, that Trump can NOT act like an adult, That Trump DOES NOT properly prepare for a debate, that Trump's incompetence during his presidency left him open for some tough debate moments that Trump, even if he weren't such a buffoon, even if he were a "very stable genius", as Trump likes to claim he is, wouldn't be able to honestly defend.

We will chalk your false allegations against Chris Wallace to hyper-partisanship and that is a HUGE gift, I actually strongly believe it is due to dishonesty as well as hyper-partisanship.

https://www.thewrap.com/chris-wallace-biden-trump-debate-performance/

Is Chris Wallace a registered Democrat? Yes, is that a crime? No. Can someone that has registered with one party or the other be a fair and just moderator? Yes, they can be, if they choose to be. Is he the only one, Journalist, moderator, average Joe Blow American citizen, to be a registered voter affiliated with a party? If you believe he is... Hey, off the subject, just out of curiosity, you wouldn't perchance be interested in purchasing a bridge or perhaps some beach front property that I just happen to own would you?

I actually watched part of the debate live, the rest I had to scrounge for on the internet because, as much as I would have liked to catch the WHOLE thing live, not all of us have such empty lives, some of us still have lives to run. Anywho... I DID see the entire debate-ish maybe, not sure if even watching the rest on the computer if I managed to watch intensely enough for the entirety because even watching on the internet, distractions happen. Both Biden AND Trump talked out of turn, Trump just happened to do it a bit more frequently and aggressively. I saw no obvious signs of gross bias, to be honest, it appeared that Wallace did a VERY fine job of keeping bias OUT OF the debate.. But then I am not a Trumplican, disgruntled by the fact that Trump did so poorly in that debate, as we knew he would. I am also not a big supporter of Biden even though as a centrist, I should be. Biden may be a Democrat, but he is a very moderate Democrat. I like moderates, both Republican AND Democrat. Do I or have I ever voted for a Democrat? Quite a few. Have I ever voted for a Republican? A fair few, admittedly not as many as the Democrats I have voted for but... Have I ever voted for someone from a party NOT Democrat or Republican? No, and for good reason. In this two party system we have, a vote for a third party candidate or a candidate NOT affiliated with a party is a wasted vote or to put another way, a vote for the winning party since the vote was in fact wasted on someone with little to no chance of winning it effectively didn't go to the winning party's opponent.

Okay, so, we have discussed what? All four of the allegations? The only one you got "rightish" is the fact that Fox news' rating are plummeting, you just applied faulty logic to WHY that is. Even though you got the WHY wrong, I will credit you with one whole point out for the "Fox news' ratings are falling" claim, so, one out of four, not a good track record. But wait... There is another claim you made... The failed campaign smear against Biden. Yes, the FBI did admit to having a laptop purported to be Hunter Biden's. Let me ask you this, If I were to take a laptop that I no longer care about, put what looks to be "damning evidence" connecting you with an alleged crime, took it to the FBI or called them and told them I had it and that it contained "damning evidence" of your alleged "heinous crimes", does that now mean that you DO in fact own the laptop and that you DID in fact commit those "heinous crimes" I am alleging? The FBI has neither confirmed nor denied whether the laptop did in fact belong to Hunter himself. The only ones "positively" linking Hunter to that laptop or even confirming the existence and legitimacy of "damning evidence contain whereon said laptop are the crackpot nut jobs and their preferred "news" sources.

Do I have to remind you of the fact that IF only one side of the aisle is reporting on a story, especially if ONLY the furthest fringe of the media sources from that one side of the aisle, are reporting it, then it is almost certainly FAKE NEWS! That coupled with the fact that many sources have debunked the claim, the computer repair store owner, a staunch Trump supporter according to several sources, who initially was reported as the one that signed the laptop into the store but later said he wasn't even there when the laptop came in, he is even saying he can't say for certain the laptop actually belongs to Hunter. There have been many holes shot into that CT and then we have the fact that the FBI supposedly has had said laptop for over a year and nothing concrete is happening? On top of that we have the fact that Giuliani even told us he was planning an "October surprise", Rudy tried real hard to peddle his story to any questionable RW media sources and was turned down by everyone EXCEPT NY Post, Even Fox declined the story. Couple that with the fact that EVEN THOUGH we were told there would be another damning release of information "tomorrow", tomorrow never came. The bogus campaign smear disappeared as fast as it came to light and with zero explanation within days of election day with nothing to show for all that "damning evidence". How many clues does it take to get a Trumplican to see that they got played?

Okay, you win, I will post some links for you.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/08/obamagate-hunter-biden-laptop-434984

https://apnews.com/article/trump-questions-joe-biden-hunter-biden-88e27ca2b5e6d7c821d9a6a0ba0e04f8

Continued 1/2

Nope, anything NOT based in reality tends to come from fringe media, you know, the sites that post dis-information and lies mixed with a healthy dose of CTs. You NEVER wonder why it is that so many articles/stories, posted on certain sites never get reported on by legitimate media... Err... I mean rino media and lyin' leftists MSM.

Please tell me, why DO you fear reality so badly? What about reality scares you so much? I have heard that if you expose yourself to limited doses of that which you fear and gradually increase the dosage over time and carefully ensure you do not exceed your discomfort limit for too long or to too extreme a level, you can become adjusted to tolerate exposure to that which terrifies you. It shouldn't hurt to try it and who knows, it may be of great benefit to you.